“You make a good point about the high overhead probably being the reason for the sale, Lois. I can’t figure out why someone in Mr. Della Femina’s position would feel forced to sell because of the higher taxes in 2013, which would amount to an additional 8.8% (5% higher capital gain +3.8% surtax on income over $250,000 for the Affordable Care Act a.k.a. Obamacare) had he sold in 2013 vs 2012.

“Assuming a $20 million gain on the property held for decades, that would amount to $1.76 million in savings by selling in 2012. With a Manhattan townhouse and Palm Beach properties, plus the value of the Hamptons house, it’s reasonable to assume Mr. Della Femina’s has net worth in excess of $50 million. With that amount of net worth, I can’t understand why a 3.5% reduction in net worth due to the tax implications would make someone feel like they absolutely had to sell NOW. If that was the case, it sounds like borderline irrational behavior to me. Your assumptions about wanting to reduce overhead sound more plausible.

“And, of course, Rupert Murdoch’s New York Post has its own axe to grind trying to make it look like Obama forced Mr. Della Femina’s hand. The Post article implies a 40% rise in taxes in the same sentence it mentions a 5% rise in taxes,and the reality of an 8.8% rise in taxes in the case of Mr. Della Femina. That represents just 1 pretty decent year in overall investment return. Spin, spin, spin.”